From: Lance Crimm (Lance_Crimm@daystar.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 1997 - 09:56:22 EDT
6/18/97 8:56 AM
Thanks for this explanation on this theory as well as the succint sources.
I personally like ones from the 5th century and look forward at looking
at them further. I wonder if there are such explanations for the
other theories on His geneology. It certainly is not of utmost
importance as salvation of the lost is much more important;
however, it sure is interesting and several motivating points
can be made for supporting the inerrancy of Scripture (which I am
very determined about by faith).
Date: 6/18/97 8:41 AM
To: Lance Crimm
On 17 Jun 97 (15:38:21), firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>=A0I was wondering what the general consensus is out there on the
>=A0difficulty of different geneologies of Jesus.
>=A0Is Matthew's Joseph's and Luke's Marys?
>=A0Or is it the fairly recent thing I heard that perhaps Joseph was
>=A0adopted and he goes back to DAvid both ways?
>=A0Or is it something else? I would tend to think it is important for us=
>=A0to figure out since the Bible has it in there.
As a newbie to this list, may I interject what may answer Lance's question=
The late Principal J Stafford Wright wrote concerning the genealogies of
"The simplest explanation is that the genealogy in Luke 3 is that of Mary,=
since the early chapters of Luke's Gospel are clearly written from Mary's
point of view. In Luke, Jospeh is the son of Heli [some prefer the spellin=
Eli], whereas in Matthew's Gospel he is described as the son of Jacob.
"Let us suppose, then, that Mary's father was Heli. Mary had a sister; we
are=A0told that 'standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his
mother's sister' (John 19:25). We are nowhere told of a brother. If,
therefore, Heli had two daughters only, the line, which was always traced
through the male line, would have died out. The regulations quoted in
Numbers 27:1-11 and 36:1-9, were that, when daughters only survived, their=
possessions and their family name required a male relative, or at least
someone of the same tribe, to carry them on. Even if Joseph was not a (nea=
relative of Mary, he was one of the line of David, and, in marrying her, h=
carried on the line of Heli, thus becoming the son [in law] of Heli."
(JS Wright, /Our Mysterious God/, Marshalls, 1983, p 105)
The view that Luke's list is Mary's genealogy was held by people such as
Luther, Bengel, J Lightfoot, Wieseler, Godet, B Weiss, AT Robertson,
N Geldenhuys and others; maybe as early as the 5th century (Lagrange,
/Evangile=A0selon St Luc/, p 119. IH Marshall, /The Gospel of Luke/,
Paternoster=A01978, p 158, attributes the theory to Annius Viterbo (1490).=
Another view, in FF Bruce & JG Machen, /The Virgin Birth of Christ/, is
that=A0Matthew gives the line of royal descent (where a sovereign's succes=
is=A0not always his son) from David to Joseph; whereas Luke gives the natu=
succession back from Joseph to David and Adam.
Commenting further, John Wenham /Redating Matthew, Mark and=A0Luke/, Hodde=
London, 1991, adds "Luke's taking the genealogy back to Adam fits well wit=
the 'last Adam' theology of his travelling companion Paul (1 Cor 15:45).
This information about Mary's descent provides a valuable complement,
theologically as well as historically, to what Matthew has told us" (p216)=
-- =A0Ben Crick, BA Bristol, 1963 (hons in Theology) =A0<email@example.com> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) =A0
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ >From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Jun 18 08:27:40 1997 Received: from mail.virginia.edu (mail.Virginia.EDU [184.108.40.206]) by atl.eni.net (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id IAA27350 for <email@example.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:27:40 -0400 Received: from Virginia.EDU by mail.virginia.edu id ad28993; 18 Jun 97 8:26 EDT Received: from fm3.facility.pipex.com by mail.virginia.edu id aa28972; 18 Jun 97 8:26 EDT Received: from 220.127.116.11 [18.104.22.168] by fm3.facility.pipex.com with smtp (Exim 1.59 #22) id 0weItl-0003ah-00; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:27:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ben Crick <firstname.lastname@example.org> Reply-To: email@example.com To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Wed, 18 Jun 97 12:38:37 X-Mailer: VTi Internet Email reader 1.09 : aa Subject: Re: wondering.... Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-printable Message-Id: <E0weItlemail@example.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:19 EDT